The main goal of this project was to research teachers’ experience with teacher induction. Although there has been much research conducted in the areas of teacher induction, mentoring, and retention, we wanted to clearly examine our personal experiences in relation to district support and academic literature. The personal experiences of our group were valuable because they gave authenticity to the project, as we were able to support patterns, concepts, and ideas with real lived examples and experiences.
We chose an ethnographic lens to approach our research, as our intent was to analyze values and patterns among a culture-sharing group. The culture-sharing group was a small group of three high school teachers in both the public and private systems. Our experiences with the accessibility of induction support also varied. One of the districts we represent offered a mentoring program that paired a beginning teacher with an experienced teacher for one full year. The two other districts had limited induction resources. The methodology was threefold and involved researcher as subject interviews, research about current induction programs in different districts, and a review of the academic research.
Although we could have chosen a number of different approaches to document and capture the experiences of the teachers, we conducted researcher as subject interviews with each other to relate, unpack, and deconstruct our lived experiences. Given the scope of the project and the limited time available to us, we selected interviews as the mode of research to delve into the varied experiences of beginning teachers who encountered induction. We typify a valid subset of the teacher population with varied perspectives and observations that makes our research richer and more tangible to our audience. Semi-structured interviews were used to ensure that we accurately captured the experiences. There were also opportunities for the researchers to ask for elaboration or clarification.
Interviews
The interview questions were based on the current research in the area of induction. As researchers, we wanted to examine both sides of the induction experience: as beginning teachers in the first five years of teaching, but also in the role of a mentor. Examining both sides of the coin was important as we wanted to see if there were any differences between expectations, perceptions, and needs between the beginning and mentor teachers. Given that mentor teachers often have more years of experience, you might expect that recommended supports would differ.
Interview Questions:
Questions
The first two questions were designed to build and understand the context of each teacher’s experience. Specific questions were asked about how long the teacher had been teaching for and in what context. A question was also asked about the teaching induction experiences.
1. How many years have you been teaching? In what context?
2. Describe your experiences with teacher induction.
The next five questions were specific to the induction supports. The researchers wanted to know how teachers were supported, whether the supports were useful, and how they had wished they had been better supported.
3. Did you feel supported in your first five years of teaching?
4. What was your best support during your first five years of teaching?
5. How do you wish you had been better supported during your first five years of teaching?
6. How do you think induction should be implemented?
7. What supports would you continue to recommend? Why?
The following two question examined the value of induction to the beginning teachers and identified the advantages and disadvantages of these types of supports and programs.
8. What are the advantages/disadvantages of induction?
9. Do you think teacher induction has value? Why or why not?
The remaining questions focused on the experiences of the mentor. Although we were unsure whether the interviewed teachers had any mentor experiences, we still wanted to examine the flip side as mentors as they can provide a unique perspective to how beginning teachers need to be supported.
10. Have you ever been a mentor? (Informal or Formal)
11. What were your experiences as a mentor?
12. From a mentor’s perspective, what supports do you think beginning teachers need?
13. As a mentor, how could you have been better supported?
Research Subjects
Once the interview questions were completed, we had to decide on the research subjects. For practical reasons, we chose to interview ourselves because we knew that our own experiences would provide rich information about how we were supported as beginning teachers. We realize that there were many other options available to us. We could have chosen to conduct face-to-face interviews or paper/online surveys and these are certainly future areas of exploration.
However, given the brevity of the semester, and the depth to which we wanted to explore induction, we felt that it would be more of a learning experience to deeply explore our own practice and experiences first. Submitting the proposal through the Behavioural Research Ethics Board (BREB) was also an area of consideration. If we chose to interview teachers from different districts, this would require BREB, which would have necessitated BREB review and acceptance which would have added more time prior to the interviews and the transcription process. At a practical level, this was not time that we had.
Data Collection Process
The data collection involved a unique process. Researching our own experiences was intentionally done through the use of a wiki. A wiki is a website that allows the easy access, creation and editing of a number of interlinked web pages. Choosing this method of recording our experiences was threefold. First, we wanted to ensure that we captured all the information in a written format. Traditionally, interviews involve the interviewer recording the conversation. This conversation is then transcribed, which can be a very time consuming process. Using the wiki to record our interviews was our form of transcription. We essentially had conversations with each other; the only difference was that the conversations were done online. The beauty of this process was the fact that it helped to ensure that we did not miss anything in the conversations between each other.
Second, the wiki was used for practical reasons. Given the limited time of three full-time working teachers, it was often difficult to meet face-to-face or even conference call on the phone. Therefore, the wiki was a perfect tool for allowing us to have “simultaneous” conversations without being together in the same time and space.
Third, the wiki allowed us to work efficiently. The wiki enabled us to have multiple conversations at the same time. Each researcher could have access to the website concurrently. Once the initial round of interview questions was completed, we spent an additional week asking each other follow up questions to elaborate or clarify parts of the interview. A color-coding system, that had previously been set up as we were brainstorming, was continued, making the questioning and answering process very easy. Each person had a unique color and responses on the wiki were always written in these colors. This simulated a conversation, where clarification questions and answers could be added.
Once the interview questions and follow up questions were complete, the interviews were "locked" so no more changes could be made. Although we could have continued endlessly to add more information about experiences, thoughts, and feelings, we knew that we already had a rich supply of information to work with. We also wanted to maintain the integrity of the interview answers by not continuing to change them.
Coding
Coding the interviews was an important process for looking at the trends in our experiences and identifying how and if they related to the research in this field. First we individually read the interviews and identified trends and themes. The goal of this was to look at the data as objectively as possible. Once the trends were individually identified, as a group, we made comparisons using a T-Chart. There were many commonalities between the three teacher’s experiences, but three common themes clearly emerged: Multiple Cultures, Experiences and Relationships, and Supports. From here, we went back to the interviews and research and correlated the themes with evidence.
The main goal of this project was to research teachers’ experience with teacher induction. Although there has been much research conducted in the areas of teacher induction, mentoring, and retention, we wanted to clearly examine our personal experiences in relation to district support and academic literature. The personal experiences of our group were valuable because they gave authenticity to the project, as we were able to support patterns, concepts, and ideas with real lived examples and experiences.
We chose an ethnographic lens to approach our research, as our intent was to analyze values and patterns among a culture-sharing group. The culture-sharing group was a small group of three high school teachers in both the public and private systems. Our experiences with the accessibility of induction support also varied. One of the districts we represent offered a mentoring program that paired a beginning teacher with an experienced teacher for one full year. The two other districts had limited induction resources. The methodology was threefold and involved researcher as subject interviews, research about current induction programs in different districts, and a review of the academic research.
Although we could have chosen a number of different approaches to document and capture the experiences of the teachers, we conducted researcher as subject interviews with each other to relate, unpack, and deconstruct our lived experiences. Given the scope of the project and the limited time available to us, we selected interviews as the mode of research to delve into the varied experiences of beginning teachers who encountered induction. We typify a valid subset of the teacher population with varied perspectives and observations that makes our research richer and more tangible to our audience. Semi-structured interviews were used to ensure that we accurately captured the experiences. There were also opportunities for the researchers to ask for elaboration or clarification.
Interviews
The interview questions were based on the current research in the area of induction. As researchers, we wanted to examine both sides of the induction experience: as beginning teachers in the first five years of teaching, but also in the role of a mentor. Examining both sides of the coin was important as we wanted to see if there were any differences between expectations, perceptions, and needs between the beginning and mentor teachers. Given that mentor teachers often have more years of experience, you might expect that recommended supports would differ.
Interview Questions:
Questions
The first two questions were designed to build and understand the context of each teacher’s experience. Specific questions were asked about how long the teacher had been teaching for and in what context. A question was also asked about the teaching induction experiences.
1. How many years have you been teaching? In what context?
2. Describe your experiences with teacher induction.
The next five questions were specific to the induction supports. The researchers wanted to know how teachers were supported, whether the supports were useful, and how they had wished they had been better supported.
3. Did you feel supported in your first five years of teaching?
4. What was your best support during your first five years of teaching?
5. How do you wish you had been better supported during your first five years of teaching?
6. How do you think induction should be implemented?
7. What supports would you continue to recommend? Why?
The following two question examined the value of induction to the beginning teachers and identified the advantages and disadvantages of these types of supports and programs.
8. What are the advantages/disadvantages of induction?
9. Do you think teacher induction has value? Why or why not?
The remaining questions focused on the experiences of the mentor. Although we were unsure whether the interviewed teachers had any mentor experiences, we still wanted to examine the flip side as mentors as they can provide a unique perspective to how beginning teachers need to be supported.
10. Have you ever been a mentor? (Informal or Formal)
11. What were your experiences as a mentor?
12. From a mentor’s perspective, what supports do you think beginning teachers need?
13. As a mentor, how could you have been better supported?
Research Subjects
Once the interview questions were completed, we had to decide on the research subjects. For practical reasons, we chose to interview ourselves because we knew that our own experiences would provide rich information about how we were supported as beginning teachers. We realize that there were many other options available to us. We could have chosen to conduct face-to-face interviews or paper/online surveys and these are certainly future areas of exploration.
However, given the brevity of the semester, and the depth to which we wanted to explore induction, we felt that it would be more of a learning experience to deeply explore our own practice and experiences first. Submitting the proposal through the Behavioural Research Ethics Board (BREB) was also an area of consideration. If we chose to interview teachers from different districts, this would require BREB, which would have necessitated BREB review and acceptance which would have added more time prior to the interviews and the transcription process. At a practical level, this was not time that we had.
Data Collection Process
The data collection involved a unique process. Researching our own experiences was intentionally done through the use of a wiki. A wiki is a website that allows the easy access, creation and editing of a number of interlinked web pages. Choosing this method of recording our experiences was threefold. First, we wanted to ensure that we captured all the information in a written format. Traditionally, interviews involve the interviewer recording the conversation. This conversation is then transcribed, which can be a very time consuming process. Using the wiki to record our interviews was our form of transcription. We essentially had conversations with each other; the only difference was that the conversations were done online. The beauty of this process was the fact that it helped to ensure that we did not miss anything in the conversations between each other.
Second, the wiki was used for practical reasons. Given the limited time of three full-time working teachers, it was often difficult to meet face-to-face or even conference call on the phone. Therefore, the wiki was a perfect tool for allowing us to have “simultaneous” conversations without being together in the same time and space.
Third, the wiki allowed us to work efficiently. The wiki enabled us to have multiple conversations at the same time. Each researcher could have access to the website concurrently. Once the initial round of interview questions was completed, we spent an additional week asking each other follow up questions to elaborate or clarify parts of the interview. A color-coding system, that had previously been set up as we were brainstorming, was continued, making the questioning and answering process very easy. Each person had a unique color and responses on the wiki were always written in these colors. This simulated a conversation, where clarification questions and answers could be added.
Once the interview questions and follow up questions were complete, the interviews were "locked" so no more changes could be made. Although we could have continued endlessly to add more information about experiences, thoughts, and feelings, we knew that we already had a rich supply of information to work with. We also wanted to maintain the integrity of the interview answers by not continuing to change them.
Coding
Coding the interviews was an important process for looking at the trends in our experiences and identifying how and if they related to the research in this field. First we individually read the interviews and identified trends and themes. The goal of this was to look at the data as objectively as possible. Once the trends were individually identified, as a group, we made comparisons using a T-Chart. There were many commonalities between the three teacher’s experiences, but three common themes clearly emerged: Multiple Cultures, Experiences and Relationships, and Supports. From here, we went back to the interviews and research and correlated the themes with evidence.